Process Mapping for the Legal Sector: 5 Key areas it could go wrong

If you are a lawyer, tech developer, or legal professional, process mapping can be an invaluable tool. It can help to streamline processes, improve communication and collaboration between teams, and increase efficiency.

But with process mapping comes potential pitfalls. To ensure your legal team reaps the full benefits of process mapping, it’s important to understand where the key areas of risk lie so that you can avoid them.  Let’s dive in and explore the key areas where process mapping goes wrong.

1. Legal Transactions follow a Non-Linear Pattern: Even when the type of law lends itself to each transaction following a linear pattern, Legal transactions do not follow a linear pattern – we call it the dichotomy of practice!

So linear process maps don’t always “work” for lawyers because most transactions are complex nature and need to be able to run with flexibility (lawyers need process maps to be bespoke for each individual client). It is therefore important to get input from people who understand the legal processes when creating process maps.

2. Hubris in Designing Legal Processes: Tech developers/non-lawyers can have a hubristic attitude when designing legal processes, because they appear relatively simple to understand at first glance; however, as we mentioned above, they are often not as straightforward as they appear and require input from the legal team to get the balance right.

3. Poor Testing of Process Maps: The testing aspect of successful process maps is often not undertaken with people who will use them – resulting in ineffective implementation that does not meet user needs or expectations.

4. Poorly Designed Processes + Technology = Suboptimal Outcomes: If technology is added to a poorly designed process, the best outcome that is possible to achieve, is that the poorly designed process is written into your technology. This is like taking your rubbish with you as you move house. The more efficient way to process map is to write “best practice” processes into the new technologies or systems being put into place.

Working with people who understand both the processes and technology involved is essential for successful implementation of any new system or technology within your organization's workflow.

5. Non lawyers often do not pay attention to the plethora of Regulations that govern the Profession: They are not used to having to comply with statutes, regulations and rules, and they often don’t understand why legal practices have to be so “pedantic” in their behaviours and processes. This lack of understanding means that process maps may not be written with best compliance practice in mind.

Conclusion:

Process mapping has many benefits for legal teams but also comes with its own set of risks and potential pitfalls if done incorrectly.

It's important to take these risks seriously so that you can ensure that your team gets all the benefits without any unnecessary hiccups along the way! Ultimately understanding where these key areas of risk lie will help you create more effective system implementations within your organisation — making sure everyone reaps the full rewards of successful process mapping.